Natasha Burge Latest Censorship Victim -Suspended from Class for Pro-Christmas Facebo

Written by Paul Fromm

Wednesday, 21 December 2011 00:46

Natasha Burge -- Latest Censorship Victim -- Suspended from Class for Pro-Christmas Facebook Postings A 19-year old Windsor, Ontario high school senior learned that those Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees -- freedom of opinion, freedom of speech and all that -- she'd been taught in history class definitely don't apply to her. A cloyIngly politically correct Kennedy Nigh School principal backed by the equally PC Essex Board of Education suspended Natasha Burge for five days for posting her pro-Christmas views on her own time on her own Facebookpage. " A Windsor high school student has been suspended after accusing schools of abandoning Christmas and the national anthem and then making disparaging comments about minority students on her Facebook page Natasha Burge, 19, reposted a comment Nov. 3 saying those who feel offended by Christmas celebrations and the singing of the national anthem at school should “please feel free to go back to your own fucking country,' Burgegoes on to suggest walking through Kennedy Collegiate dressed up as Santa and 'screaming merry christmas to the arabs, pakis, towel heads and whatever other race that doesn't like it.' Burge said she was called in to meet the vice-principal Wednesday, shown a printout of the original comment and told she was under suspension until Monday. Burge claims she was given no more explanation and, when she returned Thursday to try to discuss the matter, was told to leave or face further discipline. 'It’s ridiculous I get suspended over something I believe in — we should be allowed to say, ‘Merry Christmas,' said Burge, who is enrolled in fifth-year Grade 12 courses.'If you don’t like it, delete it off your wall or unfriend me,' she said of the options available to the Facebook friend who alerted school authorities.|" (*Windsor Star*, Dec. 9, 2011) The time was that schools governed a student's conduct on school property. Not any more. In selected instances, the school plays politically correct Big Brother in all aspects of the student's life. "Public school board spokesman Scott Scantlebury said any actions by pupils, including 'inappropriate' Facebook posts, that are deemed to negatively affect 'the moral tone of a school' can, under Ontario’s Safe Schools Act, be dealt with by a suspension.When it comes to a school’s code of conduct, Scantlebury said that, “as with the law, ignorance is not an excuse.” "Moral tone of the school?" Really! What would the school do about Tameeshawho, say, has just had her third illegitimate child and is collecting welfare and is still in grade 10? Do her parasitic ways enhance the "moral tone" of the school? Would she be suspended or condemned? Of course not. Many teens write of being bored and getting drunk and worse on their Facebook pages. Are they suspended as acting -- here's that empty politically correct word -- "inappropriately"? Of course not! Fortunately letters-to-the editor and Facebook have been on fire with support for Natasha's spirited, if somewhat profane, support for Christmas. What especially galls the politically correct school board is that Natasha reflects the healthy spirit so long suppressed in Majority Canadians. They believe newcomers should get with the agenda. They come from failed cultures. They should not insist on imposing their failed cultures here on us. If they realty don't like it here, by all means, they should go back. We shouldn't have to abandon or suppress our culture to please them. Actually,relatively few newcomers object to Christmas. The real villains are our scalawag traitor politically correct class who cannot get rid of the Majority and our culture fast enough. People interested in protesting the school's interference in Natasha Burge'sright to free speech might like to contact: Mr. A Timmins, Principal c/o Hon. W.C Kennedy Collegiate Institute, 245 Tecumseh Rd.., East, Windsor, ON., N8X 2R2 519-254-6475; FAX: 519-254-6750 [email protected] *Paul Fromm* *Director* *Canadian Association for Free Expression* Teen suspended over Facebook comments Racial slurs mixed with Christmas commentary stir controversy By Doug Schmidt, The Windsor starDecember 9, 2011 Comment 305 - Story - Photos ( 3 ) [image: Kennedy Collegiate student Natasha Burge, 19, is photographed near her school on Dec. 8, 2011. She was suspended for making racial remarks on Facebook.] More Images » Kennedy Collegiate student Natasha Burge, 19, is photographed near her school on Dec. 8, 2011. She was suspended for making racial remarks on Facebook. *Photograph by: *Dan Janisse, The Windsor Star WINDSOR, Ont. -- A Windsor high school student has been suspended after accusing schools of abandoning Christmas and the national anthem and then making disparaging comments about minority students on her Facebook page. Natasha Burge, 19, reposted a comment Nov. 3 saying those who feel offended by Christmas celebrations and the singing of the national anthem at school should “please feel free to go back to your own (expletive) country,” Burge goes on to suggest walking through Kennedy Collegiate dressed up as Santa and “screaming merry christmas to the arabs, pakis, towel heads and whatever other race that doesnt like it.” Burge said she was called in to meet the vice-principal Wednesday, shown a printout of the original comment and told she was under suspension until Monday. Burge claims she was given no more explanation and, when she returned Thursday to try to discuss the matter, was told to leave or face further discipline. “It’s ridiculous I get suspended over something I believe in — we should be allowed to say, ‘Merry Christmas,’” said Burge, who is enrolled in fifth-year Grade 12 courses. “If you don’t like it, delete it off your wall or unfriend me,” she said of the options available to the Facebook friend who alerted school authorities. Those authorities said Thursday they were not permitted to comment publicly in respect to disciplinary action involving specific individuals. Kennedy principal Al Timmins said the issue was being dealt with internally and that suspensions can be meted out “for a variety of reasons.” Public school board spokesman Scott Scantlebury said any actions by pupils, including “inappropriate” Facebook posts, that are deemed to negatively affect “the moral tone of a school” can, under Ontario’s Safe Schools Act, be dealt with by a suspension. When it comes to a school’s code of conduct, Scantlebury said that, “as with the law, ignorance is not an excuse.” Kennedy is “an extremely multicultural” school, with students of 52 national and cultural backgrounds, he said. The publicly funded school board says it must take all represented cultures into consideration, but making a big deal of O Canada and Christmas appears to still be OK. “Given that so many of our students are of Christian faith, we can’t negate the fact (that Christmas) is a major religious occasion,” said Rachel Olivero, diversity officer with the Greater Essex County District School Board. When it comes to free speech, people are entitled to their opinions — until it reaches a point of intolerance, she said. “When somebody says, ‘Go back to your own country’ ... that incites hatred,” said Olivero. Tolerance is the important thing, she said. “In 2011, can we celebrate Christmas in our schools? Absolutely — say Merry Christmas!” she said. “At the same time, don’t be offended if someone comes up to you at another time of year and says, ‘Eid Mubarak’ or ‘Happy Diwali,’” she added. Burge said she doesn’t agree with the suggestion to send people who think differently back to other countries, but she concurs with the sentiment of the original posting that new Canadians should accept that Christmas and the national anthem are important traditions in the local school system. “It’s something I strongly believe in ... people should adapt to the way Canada is,” Burge told The Star. And the student, who plans on moving on to college next, with dreams of one day becoming a firefighter, said her comments were not intended to be hurtful to others. “Everybody knows I’m not racist. I have a lot of friends who are Arabic, Pakistani, blacks,” said Burge. But she agreed others might not see it that way based on her Facebook musings and postings. *[email protected]* Read more: http://www.windsorstar.com/life/Teen+suspended+over+Facebook +comments/5833158/story.html#ixzz1h6eC8RMy

 

Hateful words can hurt -- CAFE Answers Jewish Lobbyists Marvin Kurz (B'nai Brith & Be

Written by Paul Fromm

Tuesday, 20 December 2011 07:05

Hateful words can hurt -- CAFE Answers Jewish Lobbyists Marvin Kurz (B'nai Brith & Bernie Farber (Formerly Canadian Jewish Congress) * Canadian Association for Free Expression* *Box 332,* *Rexdale, Ontario, M9W 5L3* *Ph: 905-274-3868; FAX: 905-278-2413* The Editor, *The Toronto Star*, One Yong Street, Toronto, ON. *FOR PUBLICATION* Dear Sir: Re": "Hateful words can hurt" (*Toronto Star*, December 17, 2011), Marvin Kurz and Bernie Farber, both spokesmen for Jewish groups who have long supported Internet censorship, have their facts wrong is their support for the discredited Sec. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. They wrongly identify Brian Storseth an MP who has introduced Bill C-304, a bill to repeal Sec. 13 -- Internet censorship -- as being from British Columbia. The good voters who sent him to Parliament from Westlock-St. Paul , near of Edmonton, I'm certain would disagree. Kurz and Farber aren't on any more solid grounds with their arguments for keeping this clumsy censorship law, where truth is no defence, nor is intent. They claim that Sec. 13 bans "hate speech" on the Internet. Actually, it makes posting material that "is likely to expose" designasted privileged groups to "hatred or contempt" an offence. What does "likely" mean? It's all in the eye of the beholder, the Tribunal member or judge who, get this, is appointed for having a special sensitivity to group rights as opposed to individual rights like freedom of speech. Furthermore, it is just hatred but "contempt" that can get you into trouble. That's why, perhaps, that in the 32 year history of Sec. 13 in over 50 cases, no defendant, until Marc Lemire, had ever won. Designated privileged minorities were effectively sheltered from criticism. Sec. 13 had a conviction rate usually found only in backwaters of tyranny like the Democratic Republic of the Congo and North Korea. Kurz and Farber suggest that hateful words can hurt? So what? No group should be immune to criticism, even exaggerated or hurtful criticism. Most disturbing is the way Kurz and Farber dismiss the fact that truth is not a defence. Even expert witnesses that support this law have argued that truth should be a defence. The assertion that mere hateful words led to the genocide in Rwanda or Yugoslavia is misleading. For one thing, the rants in question were not over the Internet,They were made by powerful state authorities over state owned radio. There was no means for the intended victims to reply, correct or debate. In addition, the broadcasts in both Rwanda and Yugoslavia clearly called for the extermination of people. Canada, quite rightly, already has laws forbidding people counselling others to commit a crime or create mayhem. On the other hand, the Internet is the ultimate wild democratic marketplace. There aren't just one or two voices but tens of millions. Any group that feels aggrieved or criticized can answer back. Parliament should stand up against Internet censorship and quickly pass Bill C-304. *Paul Fromm* *Director* Hateful words can hurt Published On Sat Dec 17 2011 - [image: Paul Lachine illustration] [image: Paul Lachine illustration] Paul Lachine illustration Paul Lachine/Newsart Bernie M. Farber and Marvin Kurz Sticks and stones may break our bones, the old children’s rhyme reminds us, but words can never hurt us. Well, not exactly. If the history of the last century has taught us anything, it is that words can do more damage than sticks or stones. Words, more than deeds, have become the weapons of choice to bully the vulnerable, as so many recent stories about cyber-bullying remind us. And for those who want to harm vulnerable groups instead of individuals, words are the first line of attack. Think of Rwanda, where genocide was precipitated by labelling the target group as “cockroaches” to be exterminated. Remember the former Yugoslavia, where nationalist leaders stoked ancient hatreds by using old ethnic lies. Never forget the Holocaust, where the anti-Semitic slanders of newspapers like *Der Sturmer* paved the way to the gates of Auschwitz. Because of the recognized harm that hate speech can cause to vulnerable groups, an international consensus has arisen that every county must eliminate hate speech within its borders. Canada has signed a number of treaties that oblige us to do so, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights <http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm>. One way that Canada has complied with its duty is to bring in Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act<http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/h-6/index.html>. This law sees hate speech, particularly on the Internet, as a form of discrimination. It seeks to prevent that discrimination so that all Canadians can be treated equally. And yet, British Columbia MP Brian Storseth has introduced a private member’s bill that seeks to scrap Section 13, while the Federal Court is now considering its constitutionality. Opponents of Section 13 argue that it is an assault on free speech. They claim that it targets speech that may merely offend those with thin skins. If the target of the law were merely “offensive” statements, we would wholeheartedly agree. But this is not the case. The law aims at expression that causes members of our society to be treated as less worthy than their neighbours merely because of who they are, rather than what they have done. The small number of cases that have made it to the act’s tribunal stage have been among the worst of the worst: hateful, malicious propaganda. Another argument against Section 13 is that, unlike libel law, truth is no defence. But can it ever be “true” that victims of hate speech deserve hatred and contempt? Should someone be entitled to use a tribunal hearing to “prove” that, say African Canadians are inferior, that Jews are rapacious, or that all gays are pedophiles? Section 13 tells us that we must find civil ways to prevent bigotry. That is the Canadian way. But if Storseth’s bill is passed, the state will rely exclusively on criminal prosecution to deter those who wilfully engage in promoting hatred. By ridding ourselves of Section 13, we diminish the hope that we can change attitudes through education and dialogue. We may very well unleash the blunt force of the criminal law on those who are guilty of nothing but ignorance. There remains a bitter divide on Section 13. But the debate has helped clarify the changes necessary to keep it in line with its original conciliatory intention. The decision to add financial penalties to the act should be repealed because it runs counter to the spirit of the law. We agree with the Canadian Bar Association, which supports the law but says that costs should be awarded against complainants who attempt to abuse the process. There must also be a way to summarily dismiss frivolous and vexatious complaints before they get very far. Commission staff must be crystal clear about the need to use human rights legislation against only the very worst expression.

 

Warman "Maximum Disruption" Victim Terry Tremaine Receives Free Speech Award

Written by Paul Fromm

Monday, 19 December 2011 08:11

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email newsletter was sent to you in graphical HTML format. If you're seeing this version, your email program prefers plain text emails. You can read the original version online: http://ymlp347.net/zNrwPJ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Warman "Maximum Disruption" Victim Terry Tremaine Receives Free Speech Award REGINA. December 15, 2011 Former political prisoner and Richard Warman victim Terry Tremaine was presented with the Canadian Association for Free Expression (CAFE) "Free Speech Award" at a CAFE meeting held here tonight. The citation on the plaque read: "For your courage and determination and humour defying tyranny in the Richard Warman complaints. You are the prime victim of 'maximum disruption' and your tenacity has inspired many." In presenting the award CAFE Director Paul Fromm noted: "Terry Tremaine, of all Richard Warman's targeted victims, is the one who has suffered the most. When Warman went after him in 2005 for his posts as Mathdoktor99 on STORMFRONT.ORG ( http://stormfront.org/ ), he filed a complaint under Sec. 319 of the Canadian Human Rights Act (Internet censorship). That same spring, long before this complaint was adjudicated, Warman wrote to Mr Tremaine's employer, the University of Saskatchewan, and warned that, if they didn't take appropriate action, he'd go to the police and the press. The university panicked, swiftly abandoned all notions of academic freedom and within hours Mr. Tremaine had lost his position as a math lecturer. Still, despite this, Warman went to the press and to the Regina Police with a complaint under Sec. 319 of the Criminal Code for many of the postings that were part of the human rights complaint-- surely a case of double jeopardy," Mr. Fromm noted. "Thus, is politically correct bully boy fashion, Mr., Tremaine was impoverished and unable to afford a lawyer for the Human Rights Tribunal hearing in August, 2006. Mr. Warman even sought to have me excluded as Mr., Tremaine's representative, apparently in an effort to leave him totally defenceless before the Tribunal kangaroo court. That effort failed,"Mr. Fromm noted. "Mr. Tremaine continues to be gagged and harried by Warman," Mr. Fromm added. "Warman has tried to get him jailed for 'contempt for court.' That's still working its way through the legal system. Mr. Tremaine's Sec, 319 'hate law" case will go to court June 4, 2012. It will be four years old. All this time, Mr. Tremaine has been gagged. At one point, he was not allowed to own or access a computer or the Internet. He has on his own gone back to court four time to amend these bail conditions. He can now own a computer and access the Internet (although the Regina Police can enter his residence at any time to check on what he's been doing). However, he cannot post on White Nationalist websites." "Terry Tremaine has been gagged for nearly four years -- twice the maximum sentence he could receive under Sec. 319. Canada's censorship regime is an abuse by process," Mr. Fromm charged., I despise the Canadian limousine liberals who join Amnesty International and take up the cause of some poor obscure poet in Nigeria being persecuted but ignore the plight of dissidents like Terry Tremaine in our midst." Warman, Mr. Fromm explained, in the Lemire and Tremaine Sec 13 cases, sought not just the removal of controversial comments but the shutting down of their entire website -- in effect, their silencing as a political person. At one point early in 2006, Mr. Tremaine wrote a letter of apology and recantation, Mr. Fromm recalled. "If the CHRA were really 'remedial', as the Supreme Court said it was in their Taylor ruling of 1990, that should have been the end of it. However, the implacable Warman would not settle. Mr. Tremaine rethought his retraction and has been battling for freedom ever since," Mr. Fromm conclude to sustained applause. _____________________________ Unsubscribe / Change Profile: http://ymlp347.net/ugmjhqsqgsgbbqguqy Powered by YourMailingListProvider